Golden Wheels Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Bob Hayes is one of the greatest players in Dallas Cowboys history. He finished his 11-year career with 371 receptions for 7,414 yards and 71 touchdowns, giving him an impressive 20 yards per catch average (both career touchdowns and yds per catch average remain franchise records.) He also rushed for 68 yards, gained 581 yards on 23 kickoff returns, and returned 104 punts for 1,158 yards and three touchdowns. To this day, Hayes holds ten regular-season receiving records, four punt return records and 22 overall franchise marks. But Reed played for 16 years and was more durable. Andre is fifth in NFL history in total career receptions with 951 (behind only Jerry Rice, Cris Carter, Tim Brown, and Marvin Harrison), ninth in NFL history in total career receiving yards with 13,198. Reed is also eleventh in NFL history in total career touchdown receptions with 87. He went over 1000 yards four times in a 16 year career, and was selected to the Pro Bowl in seven consecutive seasons (1988-1994). His stats are all appreciably better than Hayes'. IMO it just shows that the voting is influenced by personal politics and prejudices of the writers. I think there is still a bias against Reed because of the Super Bowl losses, as well as the perception that he could be a "bad actor" on the field. (In Super Bowl XXV against the Giants, he short armed a bunch of balls after getting hit hard on a crossing route. In Super Bowl XXVI, he disagreed with a ref's call and threw his helmet, resulting in a 15 yard penalty when the Bills still had a chance to stay in the game.) Outside of Buffalo, there is the opinion that Reed was a very good player, but not a "great" wide receiver. Andre Reed may get in the hall of fame someday, but I think he is going to have to wait a very long time just as Bob Hayes did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 As long as Andre is inducted, i don't really care how long it takes. WRs historically wait forever to get in. We'll all wait for Andre. Too bad Irvin didn't have to wait. Oh well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Bob Hayes is one of the greatest players in Dallas Cowboys history. He finished his 11-year career with 371 receptions for 7,414 yards and 71 touchdowns, giving him an impressive 20 yards per catch average (both career touchdowns and yds per catch average remain franchise records.) He also rushed for 68 yards, gained 581 yards on 23 kickoff returns, and returned 104 punts for 1,158 yards and three touchdowns. To this day, Hayes holds ten regular-season receiving records, four punt return records and 22 overall franchise marks. But Reed played for 16 years and was more durable. Andre is fifth in NFL history in total career receptions with 951 (behind only Jerry Rice, Cris Carter, Tim Brown, and Marvin Harrison), ninth in NFL history in total career receiving yards with 13,198. Reed is also eleventh in NFL history in total career touchdown receptions with 87. He went over 1000 yards four times in a 16 year career, and was selected to the Pro Bowl in seven consecutive seasons (1988-1994). His stats are all appreciably better than Hayes'. IMO it just shows that the voting is influenced by personal politics and prejudices of the writers. I think there is still a bias against Reed because of the Super Bowl losses, as well as the perception that he could be a "bad actor" on the field. (In Super Bowl XXV against the Giants, he short armed a bunch of balls after getting hit hard on a crossing route. In Super Bowl XXVI, he disagreed with a ref's call and threw his helmet, resulting in a 15 yard penalty when the Bills still had a chance to stay in the game.) Outside of Buffalo, there is the opinion that Reed was a very good player, but not a "great" wide receiver. Andre Reed may get in the hall of fame someday, but I think he is going to have to wait a very long time just as Bob Hayes did. Hayes was little more than a novelty item in Football. Nowhere near the player Reed was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Hayes was little more than a novelty item in Football. Nowhere near the player Reed was. Hayes changed the way the game was played. Bump-and-run coverage was pretty much developed to slow him down. Andre's numbers are probably better than Belitnekoff's (or just about anyone from that era) too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Hayes was little more than a novelty item in Football. Nowhere near the player Reed was. Hayes was instrumental in changing the game. He was FAR more than a novelty. With that said, both he and Andre deserve to be in the HOF. It's a crime that Hayes had to wait this long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Hayes was instrumental in changing the game. He was FAR more than a novelty. With that said, both he and Andre deserve to be in the HOF. It's a crime that Hayes had to wait this long. This is Tasker's only hope of getting in - people realizing he changed the way the game was played. They invented a Pro Bowl position for him. It was a crime that Hayes waited this long, I hope the same isn't true for Tasker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Hayes was instrumental in changing the game. He was FAR more than a novelty. With that said, both he and Andre deserve to be in the HOF. It's a crime that Hayes had to wait this long. We can disagree. Guys who can run fast down the field, with average hands that can't block are a dime a dozen. His career numbers are modest. Yes, he had big average per catch numbers for a few years and played in a time when DBs weren't the athletes that they are today. Reed along with many other receivers were better players IMO. I do give the Cowboys credit for making him a football player and getting good production from him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Philster Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 As long as Andre is inducted, i don't really care how long it takes. WRs historically wait forever to get in. We'll all wait for Andre. Too bad Irvin didn't have to wait. Oh well! Actually, Irvin didn't make it in until his 3rd year of eligibility...I think his 3 Super Bowl rings gave him an edge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Rich Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Hayes was little more than a novelty item in Football. Nowhere near the player Reed was. Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Wow. I'm assuming he never really saw Bob Hayes play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Hayes was little more than a novelty item in Football. Nowhere near the player Reed was. nowhere near?? Did you ever see him play??--I'm not saying he was better or worse--they are completely different types of receivers.Hayes was more like JD Hill or James Lofton... hayes played in an era where the ball was thrown to WRs way less...and the DBs could molest the crap out of the WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 nowhere near?? Did you ever see him play??--I'm not saying he was better or worse--they are completely different types of receivers.Hayes was more like JD Hill or James Lofton...hayes played in an era where the ball was thrown to WRs way less...and the DBs could molest the crap out of the WR. Saw him play plenty. One dimensional, modest numbers or less for HOF. Good player and a great story coming in as world class sprinter, but not HOF material to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 I'm assuming he never really saw Bob Hayes play. Saw a number of Cowboys games that he played. Sure it was fun watching him outrun people. The anticipation every time he lined up wide on 3rd and long. Not saying he wasn't good. Just don't think his numbers or one-dimensional style makes him HOF material. He wasn't a complete player and had only 6-7 productive years. average hands or less. 17 fumbles in his career. Someone mentioned Lofton. Lofton was a far better player. Reed too IMO. If only JP Losman was Hayes's QB back then. They would have been a great tandem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Saw a number of Cowboys games that he played. Sure it was fun watching him outrun people. The anticipation every time he lined up wide on 3rd and long. Not saying he wasn't good. Just don't think his numbers or one-dimensional style makes him HOF material. He wasn't a complete player and had only 6-7 productive years. average hands or less. 17 fumbles in his career. Someone mentioned Lofton. Lofton was a far better player. Reed too IMO. If only JP Losman was Hayes's QB back then. They would have been a great tandem. Given the era in which he played, his numbers are HOF worthy. And, he scored 71 TDs...that's more than Irvin's 65. But, his impact was on the way he changed the game. Renaldo Nehemiah was a side-show. Bob Hayes was a HOF football player. And, as of today, it's not just my opinion, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Given the era in which he played, his numbers are HOF worthy. And, he scored 71 TDs...that's more than Irvin's 65. But, his impact was on the way he changed the game. Renaldo Nehemiah was a side-show. Bob Hayes was a HOF football player. And, as of today, it's not just my opinion, either. So true. And they would smash the hell out of him from the line of scrimmage all the way up the field so he couldnt get behind them.Yet he still managed. With todays rules----and a strong armed QB---he would be uncoverable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts